‫ לוי ציונה‬:‫מרצה‬
‫ הוראת כישורי השפה הדבורה‬:‫שם שיעור‬
0-6116446-0 :‫מספר שיעור‬
‫ א‬:‫סמסטר‬
4 :‫שעות שבועיות‬
4 :‫נקודות זיכוי‬
Course name: Teaching speaking in the EFL classroom
Course mode: Workshops and student presentations based on reading
Name of lecturer: Tziona Levi
Hours: 2 hours, Mondays from 10:00-11: 30 (Semester I)
Abstract:
Improving oral proficiency in the EFL classroom is usually a major goal for most EFL
instructors. This course will offer effective and practical means to teach and assess the oral
skill in the English classroom relating to acceptable standards in Israel (curriculum) and
internationally (ACTFL, CEFR).
At the end of this course you should be able to:
 Describe different approaches to teaching speaking
 Explain what speech acts are and give examples of various speech acts.
 Identify communication strategies that language learners can use when
they encounter difficulties.
 Use classroom language as a model for developing oral proficiency:
classroom management language / language of in teraction i.e. questioning
 Distinguish between direct, indirect, and semi-direct tests of speaking and
design speaking assessment tasks.
 Explain the differences between objective, analytic, and holistic scoring
of speaking tests and design rubrics to match assessment speaking tasks.
 Create materials and activities based on the following task and activity
types: conversations and interviews; information gaps and jigsaw
activities; controlled conversations; scripted dialogues, drama, and roleplays; picture-based speaking activities; and physical actions .
 Give feedback on speaking performances
Student obligations
1. Attendance and Active Participation (two readings per student) 20%
2. Lesson Plan for “Teaching Speaking”; reflection on implementation 30%
to be reported at last session.
3. Critique of two speaking tasks in an English Language Textbook 30% to
be reported at last session.
4. Design a task for assessing speaking including scoring rubric and the
rationale for the selection of the task; reflection on implementa tion 20% to be
reported at last session.

Throughout the semester there will be several reading items assigned. It is imperative
therefore, that you read/study the course material and make your inquiries as necessary
before the class session when they will be discussed and applied. Your participation will be
20% of the course grade. Although this course is NOT an English conversation class per se,
you will be expected to be actively engaged within the classroom, i.e., conversant with your
peers and with me.
References
For oral proficiency lesson design






Celce-Murcia. M. (2001). Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language
(3rd ed). USA: Heinle & Heinle.
Chaney, A.L., and T.L. Burk. (1998). Teaching Oral Communication in Grades K-8.
Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Brown, G. and G. Yule. (1983). Teaching the Spoken Language. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
McDonough, J. and C. Shaw. (2003). Materials and Methods in ELT: a teacher’s
guide. Malden, MA; Oxford: Blackwell.
Nunan, D., (2003). Practical English Language Teaching. NY: McGraw-Hill.
Staab, C. (1992). Oral language for today's classroom. Markham, ON: Pippin
Publishing.
For class reading reports and expansion








McNamara, T. 2000, Language Testing, OUP. (glossary and book)
Chalhoub-Deville M. (2003). Second language interaction: current perspectives and
future trends. Language Testing. 20, (4) 369-383.
Cummings, A. 2004. Broadening, deepening and consolidating. Language Assessment
Quarterly. 1, (1), 5-18.
Foreign Language Annals. (2003) Special issue on the oral proficiency interview. 36, iv.
Stansfield, C. & Read, D. (2004). The story behind the Modern Language Aptitude Test:
An interview with John Carroll. Language Assessment Quarterly. 1, 1.
ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines:
http://www.sil.org/lingualinks/LANGUAGELEARNING/OtherResources/ACTFLProfici
encyGuidelines/contents.htm
National Standards for Foreign Language Education
http://www.actfl.org/public/articles/details.cfm?id=33
Llosa, L. (2007). Validating a standards-based classroom assessment of English
proficiency: A multitrait-multimethod approach. Language Testing. 24; 489-515.
Nakatani, Y. (2005), The Effects of Awareness-Raising Training on Oral Communication
Strategy Use. The Modern Language Journal, 89: 76–91.

Lumley, T. & O’Sullivan, B. (2005). The effect of test-taker gender, audience and topic
on task performance in tape-mediated assessment of speaking. Language Testing, 22(4),
415-437.
 Kim, Y. (2009). An investigation into native and non-native teachers’ judgments of oral
English performance: A mixed methods approach. Language Testing. 26 (2), 187–217.
 Muñoz, A. P. & Álvarez , M. E. (2010). Washback of an oral assessment system in the
EFL classroom. Language Testing. 27(1) 33–49.
The oral task
 Weir, C. J. & Wu. Jessica R.W. (2006). Establishing test form and individual task
comparability: a case study of a semi-direct speaking test. Language Testing. 23; 167-82.
 Shohamy, E. 1994. “The Validity of Direct versus Semi-Direct Oral Tests”. Language
Testing. 11, 2. 99-123.
 Elder, C., Iwashita, N. and McNamara, T. (2002). Estimating the difficulty of oral
proficiency tasks: what does the test-taker have to offer? Language Testing. 19; 347-63.
Raters, ratings and rubrics:
 Zhang, B. (2010). Assessing the accuracy and consistency of language proficiency
classification under competing measurement models. Language Testing. 27(1) 119–140.
 Shin, S. (2005). Did they take the same test? Examinee language proficiency and the
structure of language tests. Language Testing. 22; 31-45.
 Tannenbaum, R. J., Wylie, E. C. (2005). Mapping English Language Proficiency Test
Scores onto the Common European Framework: Setting Standards of Language
Proficiency on the Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL), the Test of Spoken
English (TSE), the Test of Written English (TWE), and the Test of English for International
Communication (TOEIC). ETS.
 Sawaki, Y. (2007). Construct validation of analytic rating scales in a speaking assessment:
Reporting a score profile and a composite. Language Testing. 24; 355-70.
 Maria, A. D. & Brown A. (2009). Assessing paired orals: Raters' orientation to interaction.
Language Testing. 26; 423- 440.
 Saito, H. (2008). EFL classroom peer assessment: Training effects on rating and
commenting. Language Testing. 25; 553-65.
 May, L. (2009). Co-constructed interaction in a paired speaking test: The rater's perspective.
Language Testing. 26; 397-413.
 Saito, H. I. (2008).EFL classroom peer assessment: Training effects on rating and
commenting. Language Testing. 25 (4), 553–581.
 Xi, X. (2007). Evaluating analytic scoring for the TOEFL® Academic Speaking Test.
(TAST) for operational use. Language Testing. 24; 251-272.
Peer and group interaction and assessment
 Swain, M. (2001). Examining dialogue: another approach to content specification and to
validating inferences drawn from test scores. Language Testing. 18; 275-302.
 Van Moere, A. (2006). Validity evidence in a university group oral test. Language Testing.
23.4, 411–440.
 Taylor, L., Wigglesworth, G. (2009). Are two heads better than one? Pair work in L2
assessment contexts. Language Testing. 325-339.
 Ockey, G.J. (2009). The effects of group members’ personalities on a test taker’s L2 group
oral discussion test scores. Language Testing. 26 (2), 161–186.
 Brooks, L. (2009). Interacting in pairs in a test of oral proficiency: Co-constructing a better
performance. Language Testing. 26 (3) 341–366.
 Davis, L. (2009). The influence of interlocutor proficiency in a paired oral assessment.
Language Testing. 26 (3) 367–396.
 Brown, A. & Maria, A. (2009). Assessing paired orals: Raters’ orientation to interaction.
Language Testing. 26 (3) 423–443.
 Cheng, W. and Warren, M. (2005). Peer assessment of language proficiency. Language
Testing. 22; 93-121.
 Young, Richard F. (2000). Interactional competence: challenges for validity. Paper
presented at Language Testing Research Colloquium, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
 Saito, H. & Fujita, T. (2009). Peer-assessing peers' contribution to EFL group presentations.
RELC Journal. 40, 149-171.